The Resurrection and the Blood - Part 2
In order to accurately understand Jesus’s mission and John 19:30, we must address the issue of Paul’s shorthand. As Christians, we usually use shorthand terms like “atonement” to represent entire narratives about Bible issues. N.T. Wright explains it this way,
In Christian theology, such phrases regularly act as ‘portable stories,’ that is, ways of packing up longer narratives about God, Jesus, the church and the world, folding them away into convenient suitcases, and then carrying them about with us. (N.T. Wright, The Last Word, at 24)
Paul was no different from the rest of us. He regularly employed shorthand “suitcases” in his epistles. For instance, in 1 Corinthians 1:18, we read:
For the word of the cross is to them that are perishing foolishness; but unto us which are being saved it is the power of God.
Many take this statement as referring only to the cross with the implied interpretation of John 19:30 that Jesus’s shout was the end of his mission. Paul’s own writings, however, demonstrate that the “cross” suitcase means much more. In the very same letter we read:
But if there is no resurrection of the dead, neither hath Christ been raised: and, if Christ hath not been raised, then is our preaching in vain, and your faith also in vain, and if Christ hath not been raised, your faith is in vain; ye are yet in your sins. (1 Cor. 15.13, 14, 17)
By these verses, we understand that Paul’s “cross” Samsonite includes Jesus’s resurrection. Indeed, it appears to be gross error to render “cross” as anything less than the three-day crucifixion/resurrection period. Consequently, it not hard to see that Jesus’s statement, “It is finished” could not mean the end of His mission. (I will develop this later).
While addressing scriptural suitcases, we should also look at “the shedding of blood.” Most preachers restrict the “without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins” verse to just the literal spilled blood on the cross. The usual saying is that Jesus had to shed His blood in order to save us, and it is that literal shed blood that provides the means of redemption. That statement is somewhat like unpacking just the trousers in the “shedding of blood” suitcase. It’s not everything in there. In Hebrews, it stands written:
And according to the law, I may almost say, all things are cleansed with blood, and apart from the shedding of blood there is no remission. (Hebrews 9.22)
If this verse was not a suitcase, we could interpret Jesus’s death on the cross right out of it. In Luke 22, He sweated great drops of blood as He prayed in the Garden of Gethsemane. While under Pilate’s custody, He was scourged and a crown of thorns was placed on His head. In each of these instances, Jesus literally shed His blood, but none qualifies as the singular scripturally cleansing act from sin. It is the first part of this particular verse that makes it a suitcase. Indeed, blood must be shed for the remission of sins, but it must be ritualistically applied in order to cleanse. For instance, the Old Testament priests did not just cut up their sacrificial animals, wipe their hands, and leave. They took the blood and applied it scripturally, say on the Mercy Seat, for atonement of sin. Otherwise, there was no atonement.
In future posts, we will come to see and understand that the mere shedding of blood on the cross would not effect the remission of sins. Jesus was required to ritualistically apply His own blood upon the Mercy Seat in heaven in order to obtain our redemption.